Sound, neutrality and the pursuit of everything


The audiophile hobby is inherently a pursuit of some ideal. That ideal might differ from person to person, but what I am curious about is how each of us define that ideal. 

I kinda like where my system is at. I cue a well recorded track and think: damn that sounds good. But compared to what? Do I have a point of comparison to the original performance, the day it was recorded? Usually not. To use an overused album, unless I was sitting at the Olympia concert hall in Paris when Diana Krall performed there in 2001 and have a perfect auditory memory, how do I know my system if reproducing it with “fidelity”?

If the pursuit of perfection is useless as perfection is an illusion, how do you all define your level of satisfaction or achievement in this audiophile pursuit?

jabar102

Showing 1 response by bkeske

For me, one of the most important thing is tone, the correct/proper tone of each instrument and voice. The instruments and vocals must sound ‘correct’. After that, imaging, soundstage, and a ‘holographic’ presentation. And also for me, a very ‘big’, deep, ‘lush’, and ‘full range sound’, so, full range floor standing speakers are a must have.

Of course I think of what ‘could be’ to make those things better, and do try within my means and tweak what I currently have, but what is most important to me is making the system I have today meet as much of that criteria as possible, whether an LP, CD, or very occasional streaming. I try not to compare it to anything except what I listed, and to please me, and really, no one else.

Of course, the one thing we cannot control is the way the music was mic’d, recorded, mixed, processed, etc. Thus, I typically tend to play music that also checks off those boxes, as much as possible.

Bottom line, we are far from being able to obtain a truly ‘live’ presentation through our systems, no matter how much we can invest. But, of course, we do try.